DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim status
This action is in response to applicant filed on 03/14/2025.
Claim 1 has been cancelled.
Claims 2-21 are new.
Claims 2-21 are pending for examination.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the "right to exclude" granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g.. In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-l.isp.
Claims 2-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,519,849. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-20 of 8,565,024 disclose every limitation of claims 11,519,849 in the instant application.
The same rational and analysis is applied in view US Patents 11,781,976 & 12,188,861.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 2, 3, 5, 6 & 8-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by “Exploratory study of atmospheric methane enhancements derived from natural gas use in the Houston urban area” by Sanchez, (hereinafter “Sanchez’).
Regarding claim 2: Sanchez discloses a method for monitoring air quality (taking atmospheric measurements of methane = CH4 and ethane =C2H6; abstract;), comprising:
measuring ethane and methane using a mobile sensor platform to provide sensor data (measurements using laser-based sensor system on a mobile platform (a mobile sensor platform to provide sensor data) of methane = CH4 and ethane = C2H6; abstract; page 4, third paragraph; page 7, second paragraph; page 9, first paragraph), the sensor data including methane data and ethane data captured at a nonzero mobile sensor platform speed (measurements of methane = CH4 and ethane = C2H6 using the laser-based sensor system on the mobile platform = a gasoline mid-size passenger vehicle for mobile-mode monitoring (a nonzero mobile sensor platform speed); abstract; page 4, third paragraph; page 7, second paragraph; page 9, first and third paragraphs);
identifying at least one methane peak and at least one ethane peak in the sensor data (quantifying (identifying) the amount of CH4 and C2H6 from absorption lines (peaks); abstract; page 4, third paragraph; page 7, second paragraph);
determining a correlation, the correlation being between the at least one ethane peak and the at least one methane peak (a ratio of C2H6 and CH4; abstract; page 4, third paragraph; page 7, second paragraph): and
identifying a source for the at least one methane peak based on the correlation (identifying a source based on the C2H6 to CH4 ratio; abstract; page 4, third paragraph; page 7, second paragraph), wherein the source is a non-natural gas source. (identifying the source based on the C2H6 to CH4 ratio to be biogenic source (a non-natural gas source) are statistically not significant such as Event ID 19 and 20 in table 1 (less than one percent); abstract; page 2, first paragraph; page 10, third paragraph; page 11, first paragraph; page 22, table 1).
Regarding claim 3: Sanchez discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the measuring ethane and methane further includes:
measuring the ethane and the methane using the mobile sensor platform while the mobile sensor platform is in motion such that the methane data and ethane data are captured at a mobile sensor platform speed of at least five miles per hour (measurements of methane = CH4 and ethane = C2H6 using the laser-based sensor system on the gasoline mid-size passenger vehicle for mobile-mode monitoring up to 15 miles per hour; abstract; page 4, third paragraph; page 7, second paragraph; page 9, first and third paragraphs).
Regarding claim 5: Sanchez discloses the method of claim 3, further includes:
identifying a ratio range of ethane to methane; and wherein the computer instructions for identifying the source for the at least one ethane peak and the at least one methane peak identify the source based on the ratio range (measurements of methane = CH4 and ethane = C2H6 using spectrometry to determine a ratio of C2H6 relative to CH4, wherein the ratio of C2H6 relative to CH4 is used to identify a source of CH4 emissions (identifying a ratio range of ethane to methane abstract: pace 4. third paragraph: page 7. second paragraph).
Regarding claim 6: Sanchez discloses the method of claim 5, wherein the identifying of the source for the at least one ethane peak and the at least one methane peak further includes: determining that the ratio range is less than one percent. (Sanchez: identifying the source based on the C2H6 to CH4 ratio to be biogenic source (a non-natural gas source) are statistically not significant such as Event ID 19 and 20 in table 1 (less than one percent); abstract; page 2, first paragraph; page 10, third paragraph; page 11, first paragraph; page 22, table 1).
Regarding claim 8: Sanchez discloses the method of claim 3, wherein the sensor data includes only ethane data and methane data for the mobile sensor platform having the nonzero mobile sensor platform speed (measurements of methane = CH4 and ethane = C2H6 using the laser-based sensor system with a dual C2H6/CH4 sensor (the sensor data includes only ethane data and methane data) on the gasoline mid-size passage vehicle for mobile-mode monitoring (the mobile sensor platform having the nonzero mobile sensor platform speed); abstract; page 4, third paragraph; page 7, second paragraph; page 9, first paragraph).
Regarding claim 9: Sanchez discloses the method of claim 3, further comprising: performing clustering for at least one of the at least one methane peak and the at least one ethane peak (identifying the source based on the C2H6 to CH4 ratio from the absorption lines and aggregating (performing clustering) the collected data to establish statistical mean values for the absorption lines; abstract; page 4, third paragraph; page 7, second paragraph; page 11, second paragraph; page 16, first paragraph).
Regarding claim 10: Sanchez discloses the method of claim 8, further comprising:
determining a source location based on the source, the at least one methane peak, the at least one ethane peak, a wind speed and a wind direction (identifying the source based on the C2H6 to CH4 ratio from the absorption lines, and weather station data such as wind speed and direction; abstract; page 4, third paragraph; page 7, second paragraph; page 9, second paragraph; page 11, third paragraph).
Regarding claim 11: Sanchez discloses the method of claim 3, further discloses wherein the identifying further includes:
identifying a region corresponding to elevated methane and elevated ethane and having an area corresponding to a square of a quantity (identifying an area expected to have a leak corresponding to increase in measured CH4 and C2H6 levels; abstract; page 4, second paragraph; page 5, first paragraph and figure 1; page 6, first-second paragraphs and figure 2), the quantity being the mobile sensor platform speed multiplied by a baseline time period, the baseline time period being at least thirty seconds (measurement at the gasoline mid-size passage vehicle for mobile-mode monitoring speed up to 15 miles per hours and a peak detection duration (a base line time period) of 10 minutes; abstract; page 4, second paragraph; page 5, first paragraph and figure 1; page 6, first-second paragraphs and figure 2; page 22, first paragraph);
evaluating a methane baseline and an ethane baseline for the sensor data in at least the region (using the laser-based sensor to detect background levels for the C2H6 and CH4; abstract; page 4, second paragraph; page 18, first paragraph), the methane baseline corresponding to a first median of methane data for the at least the region using new time period greater than the baseline time period, the ethane baseline corresponding to a second median of ethane data for the at least the region using new time period greater than the baseline time period, the ethane baseline (multi-day sampling to collect data for 90 hours (new time period greater than the baseline period) to aggregate data and establish statistical mean values for both C2H6 and CH4 abstract; page 4, second paragraph; page 5, first paragraph and figure 1; page 6, first-second paragraphs and figure 2; page 11, second paragraph; page 16, first paragraph);
defining a methane threshold equal to at least the methane baseline and defining an ethane threshold equal to at least the ethane baseline (the aggregate data and the statistical mean values for both C2H6 and CH4 to calculate ratio, and deviation (threshold) due to change in C2H6/CH4 ratio due to measured concentrations are indicative of the source; abstract; page 4, second paragraph; page 5, first paragraph and figure 1; page 6, first-second paragraphs and figure 2; page 11, second paragraph; page 16, first paragraph);
identifying a methane peak as sensor data including multiple methane readings in the region greater than the methane threshold, the methane peak having a location based on a methane weighted average of the multiple methane readings and identifying an ethane peak as sensor data including multiple ethane readings in the region greater than the ethane threshold, the ethane peak having a location based on an ethane weighted average of the multiple methane readings (the aggregate data and the statistical mean values for both C2H6 and CH4 to calculate ratio, and deviation due to change in C2H6/CH4 ratio due to measured concentrations are indicative of the source and thus the emission source emits C2H6 and CH4 (multiple methane/ethane readings in the region greater than the methane/ethane threshold), the data collected for multiple days and multiple datapoints aggregated and statistically combined (the methane/ethane peak having a location based on a methane/ethane weighted average of the multiple methane/ethane readings); abstract; page 4, second paragraph: page 5, first paragraph and figure 1; page 6, first-second paragraphs and figure 2; page 7, second paragraph; page 11, second paragraph; page 16, first paragraph).
Regarding claim 12: Sanchez discloses the method of claim 2, wherein the correlation being the at least one ethane peak and the at least one methane peak and between at least one amount of 13C and the at least one methane peak. (a ratio of C2H6 and CH4; abstract; abstract; page 4, third paragraph; page 7, second paragraph)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanchez in view of “A Mobile Sensing Approach for Regional Surveillance of Fugitive Methane Emissions in Oil and Gas Production” by Albertson, et al. (hereinafter “Albertson").
Regarding claim 4: Sanchez discloses the method of claim 3, further disclosing discloses the mobile sensor platform (the laser-based sensor system on the gasoline mid-size passage vehicle for mobile-mode monitoring up to 15 miles per hour; abstract; page 4, third paragraph; page 7, second paragraph; page 9, first and third paragraphs). However, it does not disclose further comprising: accounting for the mobile sensor platform speed.
In analogous art regarding methane monitoring, Albertson discloses accounting for a mobile sensor platform speed (taking into account a vehicle speed = V in which a moving sensor platform is mounted; abstract; page 2489, column 2, second-third paragraphs).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to the one of the ordinary skill in the art to include the feature of accounting for a mobile sensor platform speed, as disclose by Albertson, to the method Sanchez. The motivation is to improv qualitative and quantitative analysis by accounting for a mobile sensor speed (Albertson; abstract; page 2489, column 2, second-third paragraphs).
Claim 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanchez in view of “Mobile laboratory observations of Methane in the Barnett Shale Region” by Yacovitch.
Regarding claim 7: The combination of Sanchez, Tian and Albertson discloses the system of claim 12, but does not disclose further comprising:
determining whether a coincident CO peak is lacking for the at least one methane peak and the at least one ethane peak; and wherein the identifying the source further includes determining a natural gas source is present only if the coincident CO peak is also lacking.
In analogous art regarding methane emission monitoring, Yacovitch discloses determining whether a coincident CO peak is lacking for the at least one methane peak and the at least one ethane peak. (a methane ethane ratio measured from observed emission magnitude (peaks) of ethane and methane indicate emission form natural gas if CO peak is not present as when the CO peak is present it is an indication of the presence of other than natural gas sources such as vehicles and generators; abstract; page 7893, column 2, second paragraph).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to the one of the ordinary skill in the art to include the feature of determining whether a coincident CO peak is lacking for the at least one methane peak and the at least one ethane peak, as disclose by Yacovitch, to the system of Sanchez. The motivation is to use a CO peak to identify uncorrelated emission sources such as from generators or vehicles (Yacovitch; abstract; page 7893, column 2, second paragraph).
Claims 13 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanchez in view of “Dual-Gas Sensor of CH4/C2H6 Based on Wavelength Modulation Spectroscopy Coupled to a Home-Made Compact Dense-Pattern Multipass Cell" by Tian et al. (hereinafter “Tian").
Regarding claim 13: Sanchez discloses a system (a monitoring system; abstract), comprising:
receive sensor data captured using a mobile sensor platform, the sensor data including ethane data and methane data captured at a mobile sensor platform speed of at least five miles per hour (using laser-based senor system on a mobile platform (a mobile sensor platform to provide sensor data) moving up to 15 miles per hour to collect measurements of methane = CH4 and ethane = C2H6; abstract; page 4, third paragraph; page 7, second paragraph; page 9, first and third paragraphs);
identify at least one methane peak and at least one ethane peak in the sensor data (quantifying (identifying) the amount of CH4 and C2H6 from absorption lines (peaks); abstract; page 4, third paragraph; page 7, second paragraph);
determine a correlation, the correlation being at least one of between the at least one ethane peak and the at least one methane peak are correlated (a ratio of C2H6 and CH4; abstract; abstract; page 4, third paragraph; page 7, second paragraph) and between at least one amount of 13C and the at least one methane peak (optional); and
identifying a source for the at least one methane peak based on the correlation (identifying a source based on the C2H6 to CH4 ratio; abstract; page 4, third paragraph; page 7, second paragraph). Sanchez does not disclose the system comprising a processor configured to receive sensor data, the sensor data including ethane data and methane data; and
a memory coupled to the processor and configured to provide the processor with instructions. However, Tian discloses a system comprising a processor configured to receive sensor data, the sensor data including ethane data and methane data; and a memory coupled to the processor and configured to provide the processor with instructions (a dual sensor measuring C2H6 and CH4, the measurements are received by a computer connected to the dual sensor, the computer comprising a data acquisition card and guiding and modulation instructions; abstract; page 3, fifth paragraph and figure 1; page 4, second paragraph).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to the one of the ordinary skill in the art to include the feature of a system comprising a processor configured to receive sensor data, the sensor data including ethane data and methane data; and a memory coupled to the processor and configured to provide the processor with instructions, as disclose by Tian, to the system of Sanchez. The motivation is to utilizing a dual C2H6/CH4 sensor (Sanchez; abstract: Tian; abstract) which can be in manners well known in the art be connected to a computer either by wireless or wired connections (Tian; abstract; page 3, fifth paragraph and figure 1; page 4, second paragraph) to perform gas sensing in applications as in a leakage analysis (Tian; page 11, second paragraph).
Regarding 21: Claim 21 is rejected for the same reason of claim 13
Claims 14-16 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanchez in view of Tian and further in view of “A Mobile Sensing Approach for Regional Surveillance of Fugitive Methane Emissions in Oil and Gas Production” by Albertson, et al. (hereinafter “Albertson").
Regarding claim 14: The combination of Sanchez and Tian discloses the system of claim 13, further disclosing discloses the mobile sensor platform (the laser-based sensor system on the gasoline mid-size passage vehicle for mobile-mode monitoring up to 15 miles per hour; abstract; page 4, third paragraph; page 7, second paragraph; page 9, first and third paragraphs). However, it does not disclose further comprising: accounting for the mobile sensor platform speed.
In analogous art regarding methane monitoring, Albertson discloses accounting for a mobile sensor platform speed (taking into account a vehicle speed = V in which a moving sensor platform is mounted; abstract; page 2489, column 2, second-third paragraphs).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to the one of the ordinary skill in the art to include the feature of accounting for a mobile sensor platform speed, as disclose by Albertson, to the method Sanchez. The motivation is to improv qualitative and quantitative analysis by accounting for a mobile sensor speed (Albertson; abstract; page 2489, column 2, second-third paragraphs).
Regarding claim 15: The combination of Sanchez, Tian and Albertson discloses the system of claim 14, further includes:
identifying a ratio range of ethane to methane; and wherein the computer instructions for identifying the source for the at least one ethane peak and the at least one methane peak identify the source based on the ratio range (Sanchez: measurements of methane = CH4 and ethane = C2H6 using spectrometry to determine a ratio of C2H6 relative to CH4, wherein the ratio of C2H6 relative to CH4 is used to identify a source of CH4 emissions (identifying a ratio range of ethane to methane abstract: pace 4. third paragraph: page 7. second paragraph).
Regarding claim 16: The combination of Sanchez, Tian and Albertson discloses the system of claim 15, wherein the identifying of the source for the at least one ethane peak and the at least one methane peak further includes: determining that the ratio range is less than one percent. (Sanchez: identifying the source based on the C2H6 to CH4 ratio to be biogenic source (a non-natural gas source) are statistically not significant such as Event ID 19 and 20 in table 1 (less than one percent); abstract; page 2, first paragraph; page 10, third paragraph; page 11, first paragraph; page 22, table 1).
Regarding claim 18: The combination of Sanchez, Tian and Albertson discloses the system of claim 14, wherein the processor is further configured to: perform clustering for at least one of the at least one methane peak and the at least one ethane peak (Sanchez: identifying the source based on the C2H6 to CH4 ratio from the absorption lines and aggregating (performing clustering) the collected data to establish statistical mean values for the absorption lines; abstract; page 4, third paragraph; page 7, second paragraph; page 11, second paragraph; page 16, first paragraph).
Regarding claim 19: The combination of Sanchez, Tian and Albertson discloses the system of claim 14, wherein the processor is further configured to:
determine a source location based on the source, the at least one methane peak, the at least one ethane peak, a wind speed and a wind direction (identifying the source based on the C2H6 to CH4 ratio from the absorption lines, and weather station data such as wind speed and direction; abstract; page 4, third paragraph; page 7, second paragraph; page 9, second paragraph; page 11, third paragraph).
Regarding claim 20: The combination of Sanchez, Tian and Albertson discloses the system of claim 14, wherein to identify, the processor is further configured to:
identifying a region corresponding to elevated methane and elevated ethane and having an area corresponding to a square of a quantity (identifying an area expected to have a leak corresponding to increase in measured CH4 and C2H6 levels; abstract; page 4, second paragraph; page 5, first paragraph and figure 1; page 6, first-second paragraphs and figure 2), the quantity being the mobile sensor platform speed multiplied by a baseline time period, the baseline time period being at least thirty seconds (measurement at the gasoline mid-size passage vehicle for mobile-mode monitoring speed up to 15 miles per hours and a peak detection duration (a base line time period) of 10 minutes; abstract; page 4, second paragraph; page 5, first paragraph and figure 1; page 6, first-second paragraphs and figure 2; page 22, first paragraph);
evaluating a methane baseline and an ethane baseline for the sensor data in at least the region (using the laser-based sensor to detect background levels for the C2H6 and CH4; abstract; page 4, second paragraph; page 18, first paragraph), the methane baseline corresponding to a first median of methane data for the at least the region using new time period greater than the baseline time period, the ethane baseline corresponding to a second median of ethane data for the at least the region using new time period greater than the baseline time period, the ethane baseline (multi-day sampling to collect data for 90 hours (new time period greater than the baseline period) to aggregate data and establish statistical mean values for both C2H6 and CH4 abstract; page 4, second paragraph; page 5, first paragraph and figure 1; page 6, first-second paragraphs and figure 2; page 11, second paragraph; page 16, first paragraph);
defining a methane threshold equal to at least the methane baseline and defining an ethane threshold equal to at least the ethane baseline (the aggregate data and the statistical mean values for both C2H6 and CH4 to calculate ratio, and deviation (threshold) due to change in C2H6/CH4 ratio due to measured concentrations are indicative of the source; abstract; page 4, second paragraph; page 5, first paragraph and figure 1; page 6, first-second paragraphs and figure 2; page 11, second paragraph; page 16, first paragraph);
identifying a methane peak as sensor data including multiple methane readings in the region greater than the methane threshold, the methane peak having a location based on a methane weighted average of the multiple methane readings and identifying an ethane peak as sensor data including multiple ethane readings in the region greater than the ethane threshold, the ethane peak having a location based on an ethane weighted average of the multiple methane readings (the aggregate data and the statistical mean values for both C2H6 and CH4 to calculate ratio, and deviation due to change in C2H6/CH4 ratio due to measured concentrations are indicative of the source and thus the emission source emits C2H6 and CH4 (multiple methane/ethane readings in the region greater than the methane/ethane threshold), the data collected for multiple days and multiple datapoints aggregated and statistically combined (the methane/ethane peak having a location based on a methane/ethane weighted average of the multiple methane/ethane readings); abstract; page 4, second paragraph: page 5, first paragraph and figure 1; page 6, first-second paragraphs and figure 2; page 7, second paragraph; page 11, second paragraph; page 16, first paragraph).
Claim 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanchez in view of Tian, in view of Albertson and further in view of “Mobile laboratory observations of Methane in the Barnett Shale Region” by Yacovitch.
Regarding claim 17: The combination of Sanchez, Tian and Albertson discloses the system of claim 14, but does not disclose further comprising:
determining whether a coincident CO peak is lacking for the at least one methane peak and the at least one ethane peak; and wherein the identifying the source further includes determining a natural gas source is present only if the coincident CO peak is also lacking.
In analogous art regarding methane emission monitoring, Yacovitch discloses determining whether a coincident CO peak is lacking for the at least one methane peak and the at least one ethane peak. (a methane ethane ratio measured from observed emission magnitude (peaks) of ethane and methane indicate emission form natural gas if CO peak is not present as when the CO peak is present it is an indication of the presence of other than natural gas sources such as vehicles and generators; abstract; page 7893, column 2, second paragraph).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to the one of the ordinary skill in the art to include the feature of determining whether a coincident CO peak is lacking for the at least one methane peak and the at least one ethane peak, as disclose by Yacovitch, to the system of Sanchez, Tian and Albertson. The motivation is to use a CO peak to identify uncorrelated emission sources such as from generators or vehicles (Yacovitch; abstract; page 7893, column 2, second paragraph).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record cited in the PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR CASILLASHERNANDEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5432. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30AM-4:30PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Davetta Goins can be reached at (571) 272-2957. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/OMAR CASILLASHERNANDEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689